Hydrogeological PFAS Steering Group

​​​Request 759784008 

Under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011, please provide the following for the Hydrogeological PFAS Steering Group (established June 2025 under the Water Quality & Safety Programme): 

1. All meeting minutes, including attendance, declarations of interest, and any appended papers, from inception to date. 

2. The Action Log and Decision Log referenced in the Group’s Terms of Reference v1.1 (29/05/2025), for the same period. 

3. The most recent membership list (names, roles, employing organisations) and any changes over time. 

4. Dates and times of all meetings held, scheduled, or cancelled, and the method (in-person/virtual). 

5. Any recordings (audio/video) and chat transcripts where meetings were held virtually. 

6. Any briefing to Ministers summarising Steering Group decisions/recommendations (including those informing the 25-year capital programme for PFAS treatment and mains network expansion). 

7. Any conflict-of-interest registers maintained for Steering Group members (including representatives of Ports of Jersey and Jersey Water). 

Response 

1 

The requested information is exempt under Article 35 (Formulation and development of policies) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 as this project currently remains policy under development, with the Scheduled Public Authority’s (SPA) intention to publish in the 1st Quarter of 2026. 

Article 35 is a qualified exemption; therefore, a public interest test has been applied and is shown at the end of this response. 

Please note, further information relating to your request can be found on www.gov.je using the link below, therefore Article 23 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied.  

PFAS in Jersey​

2 

The requested information is exempt under Article 35 (Formulation and development of policies) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 as this project currently remains policy under development. 

Release of the information at this stage would likely generate misinformed debate. This could affect the ability of officials to consider and develop policy away from external pressures, and to advise Ministers appropriately.  

Article 35 is a qualified exemption; therefore, a public interest test has been applied and is shown at the end of this response. 

3 

The membership list has remained the same since the Hydrogeological PFAS Steering Group was established, with the Group Director of Regulation being the Chair.  In order to protect the identity of individuals, disclosure control has been applied to the remainder of membership list and no further information relating to these individuals will be released, therefore Article 25 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied. 

4 

All meetings are held in person.  

The dates of the meetings are shown below:  ​

19th May 2025  

16th July 2025  

2nd September 2025  

17th September 2025  

8th October 2025  

5 

There are no recordings or transcripts held by the SPA; therefore, Article 3 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 applies. 

6 

Summarisation of briefings to Ministers can be found on www.gov.je​ within the link below, therefore Article 23 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 applies. 

The remaining information is exempt under Article 35 (Formulation and development of policies) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 as this project currently remains policy under development. 

Release of the information at this stage would likely generate misinformed debate. This could affect the ability of officials to consider and develop policy away from external pressures, and to advise Ministers appropriately.  

Article 35 is a qualified exemption; therefore, a public interest test has been applied and is shown at the end of this response. 

7 

There are no conflict-of-interest registers maintained for Steering Group members; therefore, Article 3 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 applies.  

Articles applied 

Article 3 - Meaning of “information held by a public authority” 

For the purposes of this Law, information is held by a public authority if – 

(a)     it is held by the authority, otherwise than on behalf of another person; or 

(b)     it is held by another person on behalf of the authority. 

Article 23 - Information accessible to applicant by other means 

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it is reasonably available to the applicant, otherwise than under this Law, whether or not free of charge. 

(2) A scheduled public authority that refuses an application for information on this ground must make reasonable efforts to inform the applicant where the applicant may obtain the information. 

Article 25 - Personal information   

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018.  

(2) Information is absolutely exempt information if – 

(a) it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018; and  

(b) its supply to a member of the public would contravene any of the data protection principles, as defined in that Law.  

3) In determining for the purposes of this Article whether the lawfulness principle in Article 8(1)(a) of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018 would be contravened by the disclosure of information, paragraph 5(1) of Schedule 2 to that Law (legitimate interests) is to be read as if sub-paragraph (b) (which disapplies the provision where the controller is a public authority) were omitted.  

Article 35 - Formulation and development of policies 

Information is qualified exempt information if it relates to the formulation or development of any proposed policy by a public authority. 

Public Interest Test 

Information is qualified exempt information if it relates to the formulation or development of any proposed policy by a public authority. 

In applying this article, the following considerations were taken into account. 

Public interest considerations favouring disclosure  

• Disclosure of the information would support transparency and promote accountability to the general public, providing confirmation that the necessary discussions and testing have taken place.  

• Disclosure to the public fulfils an educative role about the early stages in policy development and illustrates how the department engages with parties for this purpose.   

Public interest considerations favouring withholding the information  

• In order to best develop policy and provide advice to Ministers, officials need a safe space in which free and frank discussion can take place – discussion of how documentation is presented and provided is considered as integral to policy development as iterations of documents are demonstrative of the policy development process.  

• The need for this safe space is considered at its greatest during the live stages of a policy.  

• The release of the information without comprehensive interpretation alongside other data could impact the general public with misinterpretation and generate misinformed debate. This would affect the ability of officials to consider and develop policy away from external pressures, and to advise Ministers appropriately.  

• Premature disclosure of this information may limit the willingness of parties to provide their honest views and feedback. This would hamper and harm the policy–making process not only in relation to this subject area but in respect of future policy development across wider departmental business. 

Considering all considerations above, while transparency is important, the public interest in disclosure must be weighed against potential harm caused by distress or misinformation.  

It should also be noted that once a policy is formulated and published, the public interest in withholding information relating to its formulation is diminished, however, the use of the exemption can be supported if it preserves sufficient freedom during the policy formulation phase to explore options without that process being hampered by some expectation of future publication. 

The SPA has concluded that, on balance, the risk of causing significant concerns or spreading misinformation, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the benefits disclosing the information. ​